The Rod and Greg Show: The Evils of Trans-Ideologies; Utah's New Homeless Services Campus

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The NFL season is going to get is the underway
this weekend. We're gonna have a great extravaganza of football.

Speaker 2 (00:06):
Yeah, college football. The Trump quarterback down to BYU number
forty seven, number forty seven. Now I want a saying
one has told him that yet.

Speaker 3 (00:13):
I know I have anointed that on him. I don't know.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
I'm just assuming it's the case and I will not
be told otherwise. That is a homage to President Trump
forty seven our quarterback.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
Should should we get word to Trump that, Hey, by
the way, you're a quarterback, we're in your number at
b YU.

Speaker 1 (00:28):
Yeah, at least get the word to the quarterback that
he's you know that he is the official Trump quarterback
in the state of.

Speaker 2 (00:33):
Utah orring number four. I bet he's the only quarterback
in college or professional football who's wearing number forty seven.

Speaker 1 (00:40):
Right now, I'm going to text on Junior, I am.
I'm going to tell him, Hey, check out By's quarterback's a.
It's a it's a straight up homage to your dad.
I'm gonna do it, forty I'm going to cost some chaos.
Oh you sure will. Well, it's great to be with
you on the front. You don't have saying a boy.
This week went by fast, well, of course it did.
We do work Monday. I know kind of like this
idea of a four day I think we can talk

(01:01):
the bosses into it.

Speaker 3 (01:02):
Probably four tens instead of five eighths. I don't know.
I don't know how they I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:07):
No, I like it too, but I think the bosses
might take notice of our listeners. I think i'd miss them. Yeah,
we will three days off, four days on. I like
the daily interaction.

Speaker 2 (01:17):
They may not miss us, but we'd miss them.

Speaker 3 (01:20):
No, they would miss us. I tell myself that, keep
telling yourself that.

Speaker 1 (01:24):
I call that a positive self esteem. My wife calls
it obliviousness or so anyway.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
Read the win baby, all right, A lot to get
to today. Jobs report out. Gary Gigy will join us shortly.
We'll break down the numbers. We'll talk with the head
of the Utah Homeless Services Committee, the coordinator, Wayne Niederhauser,
good friend of ours, about this new homeless campus that
they're looking at. We'll get into that, and of course
it's listened back Friday time and time to open up

(01:52):
the phones. We'll do Thank Rod and Greg in the
five o'clock Cowry. Now, we normally don't do this, but
we're big sports we are, and we realized we're not
a sports station.

Speaker 3 (02:04):
Yes we're not.

Speaker 2 (02:05):
We realized that right. But I think we have got
to dig into spitgate, folks. I don't want to happen that.

Speaker 3 (02:13):
There was a lugi.

Speaker 1 (02:14):
I don't know if that's two, if that words approved,
you know, for the airwaves digitally or over the air.
But a loogie was spat at the quarterback of the
Dallas Cowboys, and I thought it hit his neck, which
would be totally gross because it would just drip down
and that would that would just absolutely freak me out.

(02:35):
But the defensive player for the Eagles. That before the
first play of the game to kick off the NFL season,
so a lot of people are watching and slow mo
you see this thing hit the deck and then you
see he gets kicked out of the game. He's one
of their best defensive players, he's an All Pro, he's
their start. But hats off to this to Dak Prescott,

(02:55):
the quarterback for the the the Cowboys, that he didn't
do whatever every single NFL player typically does in that
moment and swings when you get spit on you swing,
you swing, that's just that's just that one equals the other.
He did not. He held his composure. He looked over
at the ref. The ref happened to see it, and
that guy got kicked out of the game. If he
had swung back, they would have both their penalties would

(03:17):
have been offsetting and they would have just started the game.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
Well, and there's another side of the story now, is
Dak was the first to spit that we understand now
that came. That came later because at first everyone thought, well,
what's he doing spinning? Well, Dak admitted he spit first,
but he was spitting on the ground. He wasn't spitting
at the player. The player Jalen Carter, thought he was
spitting at him, and that's when he approached him and said,

(03:39):
you spitting at me.

Speaker 1 (03:40):
So do you remember so you remember the Za Bruder
film from JFK. So, a man named last name is
a Bruder has one of these new fangled cameras and
he's there on June November twenty second, nineteen sixty three,
when JFK is driving the grass and all the motor
kade down. When JFK is assassinated, the zab Bruder film
becomes the the centerpiece for conspiracy theories, but also learning

(04:03):
the truth about what really happened. Nobody really thought anything
would be recorded at that time because there weren't really
a cameras. We have like zu Bruder film, like evidence
film of the spit Gate, we have, we have Dak Prescott.
It turns out later we find out during the game
he spits towards the ground, towards this player.

Speaker 3 (04:22):
Now this player is over on the wrong side of the ball.

Speaker 1 (04:24):
He's towards the huddle of the cowboys, which you're not
supposed to be Dak's prescott. You could argue is spitting
in his direction to say, hey, back off, or I'm
just spitting and you happen to be there, but you
shouldn't be there. A lot of spitting, a lot of spitting.
So but he spits, and so then he turns right.
He sees this and he comes back to him. But
we jump into the story when Naco knows to nose

(04:45):
and we see the big lugue hurl.

Speaker 3 (04:47):
Okay, he gets kicked out of the game.

Speaker 1 (04:49):
Layer in the game, we see that Dak actually spit
in his direction, which many would argue was the beginning
of this exchange, and maybe Dak should be punished for that.

Speaker 2 (05:00):
He was spitting on the ground.

Speaker 1 (05:01):
He was clearly on the ground and in a place
where the defense that no should have been standing in
the first place.

Speaker 2 (05:09):
Should have been close to the whole begin with. But
boy did it get a lot of covers last night.
The Eagles won, unfortunately, but they missed this guy. I mean,
Jalen Carter is their big defensive guy. Well I wasn't
he was gone. Now the question is going to be
greg is the NFL going to suspend him for spitting?

Speaker 1 (05:28):
I think the initial because they got some new rules
this time this in the offseason, they put some different
rules together where they wanted to put some suspension time
over the heads of some of these players because of
some of the fights things that break out. They just
they're they're wolsifying football right every chance they get. But
so that there was an initial talk that this could
lead also to a suspension. I think the subsequent slow

(05:49):
mo video of other spitting going on, I think is
going to lower the temperature on suspensions.

Speaker 3 (05:55):
I don't think you.

Speaker 1 (05:56):
My prediction is he doesn't get suspended. But folks, if
you didn't see it. The reason that we're talking about
today is that usually the first official game of the NFL,
everybody watches it gets.

Speaker 2 (06:06):
High, high rates.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
And this happened before the first snap took place. So
if you were tuning in and then when everybody tunes
in at the very beginning, when you tuned in, you
saw an NFL player in slow motion. How can a
louget the other player. It's one of those moments you
don't see very often, and if you do, it's it's
buried into some game at some point. It doesn't become Spitgate.

Speaker 2 (06:28):
Well can I can I bring up this too? The
worsification of the NFL, which is huge, game was suspended
for what an hour and ten.

Speaker 1 (06:35):
Minutes last night because there's a lightning like six miles
miles away? Are you kidding me? An hour and a
half they have to wait around Yeah, I look that.

Speaker 4 (06:45):
Man.

Speaker 1 (06:46):
If the lightning wasn't hitting a player, they were still
playing back in the day. I mean, if it hit
a fan, they were like, oh, well the fan, go, paramedics,
go tend to the to the crowd where we still
got a game going on. Now, if you folks, if
you watch the NFL highlight clip. And I'm talking from
the two thousands, like two thousand to twenty ten. I
kid you not those defensive plays that you see. I

(07:07):
think every one of them are illegal today.

Speaker 5 (07:09):
Oh probably way they way they hit their helmets hitting
linebacker for the James Harrison, but the toothless guy, oh
Jack Lambert that they asked him.

Speaker 3 (07:22):
I just saw this.

Speaker 1 (07:22):
They asked him back in the day and said, do
you think there should be any rules to protect quarterbacks?
He said, I think they should wear dresses. Yeah, I
think that would help them.

Speaker 2 (07:32):
Hey, one other sports note the w NBA, which I
know you're a big fan of. No, you watch all
the games?

Speaker 3 (07:37):
Come on, I know that's fake.

Speaker 6 (07:38):
I know you.

Speaker 2 (07:40):
You might as well kiss the season. Goodbye for the
w NBA. Caitlin Clark, she's out for the year. Why yeah,
injury really yeah? Yeah? Yeah, No, that's.

Speaker 3 (07:50):
Their home, that's the hallmark player.

Speaker 2 (07:52):
I had no idea she had groin injury and you
won't be able to recover. And she announced she won't
be back. Their ratings would go up when she was on,
not now she's not going to be around.

Speaker 1 (08:01):
Well, all the players that were giving her I thought,
I thought it went over the line. Did they really
gave her a hard time when they see that? What
I think the consequence of her not being on the court,
it'd be like Mike but by the way, it'd be
like Michael Jordan not on the court.

Speaker 2 (08:14):
YEA true.

Speaker 1 (08:15):
In the NBA, I think they're going to see the
ratings fall and maybe they'll appreciate her what she does
membership of that league and what it brings to the
value of their own contracts and everything else.

Speaker 2 (08:25):
Jobs numbers were out today, will break them down. Gary
Gigy will join us next. It is the Friday edition
of The Rotten Gregg Show right here on Utah's Talk
Radio one O five nine k n RS.

Speaker 3 (08:35):
It's Friday. We're just excited.

Speaker 2 (08:36):
Yeah, it is all right. Uh, Donald Trump always A
couple of weeks ago, the head of the Bureau of
Labor Statistics quit or got fired, got fired, and he's
got a new you know, new person in there, e J.
And Tony who we've had on the show before. Well,
this is his first report in UH in the month
of August, taking a look at the jobless numbers, and
I think it is really a true reflection as to

(08:58):
what the job market is like right now, because thanks
are a little kind of an holding stage, I believe.
But let's break down the numbers. Joining us on our
newsmaker line, Gary GigE, our good friend with Giggee Capital Management. Gary,
thanks for joining us taking a look at the numbers.
Give us the good, bad, and the ugly. What do
you see?

Speaker 7 (09:14):
Gary?

Speaker 8 (09:15):
I like how you put that up. So I think
this was a really widely expected report because, as you know,
President Trump fired who is the head of the Bureau
of Labor Statistics, which calculates the numbers, and so the
numbers came in weak, and so they were expected to

(09:35):
be around seventy seven thousand, and it came in at
twenty two thousand. And when we look at revisions to
prior months, which is we always want to do that,
then that was a revision downward of twenty one thousand.
So the net gain was one thousand, and if you
look at the month of June, it was actually a

(09:55):
net loss of thirteen thousand and so this is a
labor market that appears to be slowing. Now I find
that interesting. I think it adds credibility to why President
Trump has been asking the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates,
because if you do have a labor market that's slowing,

(10:17):
then a reduction in interest rates would not only be
a good idea, it would be appropriate. And so we'll
find out later on this month exactly what the Fed does.
Most people had been thinking that a twenty five basis point,
which means a quarter of a point reduction, was baked
in the cake. Now they're thinking it could be half

(10:40):
a point, and so we'll see what happens there. But
it definitely looks like interest rates are on the way
some of the information. Other information was that the unemployment rate,
which had been four point two ticked up to four
point three percent. So, you guys, I kind of look
at it this way. It's what I would call a
frozen labor market. People that are currently employed, they're frozen

(11:05):
in their job because they can't leave and their employers
do not want them to leave. But people that want
jobs are kind of frozen out. So there's not a
lot of hiring going on. But there's not a lot
of firing going on either. So we're I think that
the labor market as a whole is frozen, waiting to

(11:26):
see what's going to happen with tariffs and are they
going to be large or are they going to be small.
I think if like a tariff rate across the board
was ten to fifteen percent, the market could handle that.
If it's much more than that, the market hasn't factored
that into it. So there's a lot that's going on

(11:49):
right now for the next few weeks to see what
the federal Reserve is going to do. But today's report
definitely important.

Speaker 1 (11:56):
So here's my question. When we say job numbers, there's
always these cross tabs. We look at government jobs, we
look at private sector jobs, we look at service industry jobs,
we look at construction jobs. Do you see any trends
in terms of the numbers and how the Job's report
came out today that would indicate what industries are stronger
than others. I always it seems that since Trump's been elected,

(12:17):
you're seeing the government jobs number either stay stagnant or
go down. Private sector jobs seem to be climbing. Any
of that in this Job's report that struck an interest for.

Speaker 8 (12:26):
You, Greg, Yes, And so since January, government jobs are
done eighty five thousand, which is the largest seven month
drop since like the early nineteen nineties or so so
you are seeing that there was a reduction in manufacturing,
which we don't like to see. We would like to
see an increase in that. So I think that was

(12:47):
somewhat unexpected. But one month does not a trend make.
But there has been a trend of government reducing its workforce,
and that's a good thing. If we continue to see
the private sector increase or crowd out the government employees,

(13:08):
that's actually a good thing for our economy. Our economy
should be driven by the private sector, it should not
be driven by the public sector.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
Yeah, I know one item you look at. I think
I've got this right. You like to look at the
hours that people are working and give an indication what
has anything change. Are we working longer hours or is
it holding What are you seeing, Gary?

Speaker 8 (13:29):
Yeah, So in this month's report, the hours worked held steady,
So that's fine.

Speaker 4 (13:35):
But the.

Speaker 8 (13:38):
Hours that were paid, so the hourly earnings that actually
increased slightly, and it's up three point seven percent over
the last year, which again tells me employers are paying
their employees a little bit more to hold on to them,
but they're not working them more. So they're keeping the
hours about the same, but they're paying them a little
bit more because they want their employees to stick round.

(14:00):
And like I said, these employees are frozen in place.
It isn't like there's a ton of employers that are
hiring right now and they can go anywhere they want
because they can't.

Speaker 1 (14:11):
Yeah, maybe I'm getting too wonkish, but anything seasonal. I
mean sometimes you have certain types of jobs to become
they grow or retract during certain seasons of the year.
Is this a consistent trend that you would see in
a month like this in any given year, or is
this on its own any any trends by way of
the season of the year that we're in.

Speaker 8 (14:31):
Not that I'm not seeing any industry that is consistently
underperforming or outperforming right now. And so because manufacturing greg
was doing pretty good a few months ago, and but
we saw it drop this year, and so that's why
I'm a little bit hesitant to declare a trend in

(14:51):
a one month period. I would like to see manufacturing
pickup next week and continue. That would be a healthy sign.

Speaker 2 (14:58):
Very final question for you. It sounds like, as you describe,
we're kind of frozen. We're in a holding pattern. What's
gonna what's gonna shake?

Speaker 7 (15:05):
It up.

Speaker 2 (15:05):
What's gonna get it going in one direction or the other?
Will it be the interest rates?

Speaker 9 (15:09):
To you?

Speaker 7 (15:09):
Do you feel I do?

Speaker 8 (15:11):
I really think that is that if we get at
twenty five basis points to maybe a half of a
point a half of a one percent drop in interest
rates later on this month, the market wants that and
that will help a lot of things. The only thing
that it will not help is people that are savers

(15:31):
and they will earn less on their money that's sitting
in a savings account. But in theory, hopefully mortgage rates
could could come down. Now, the last time that the
government lowered interstrates, mortgage rates did not come down. So
we'll have to wait and see how the market treats that.
But a drop in interest rates is definitely a tailwind
pushes and pushes the economy going forward at a faster pace.

Speaker 2 (15:54):
Gary, thank you for your very much for you so
I always enjoy Gary's analysis.

Speaker 1 (15:58):
Well, she's tak Yeah, you are absolutely calling balls and strikes.
You can trust what he says, and I love it
when he comes on the program and gives us a
good snapshot of what's going on.

Speaker 2 (16:07):
Quick note on jobs, PBS slashing fifteen percent of their workforce,
laying off one hundred people after Trump cut their funding.

Speaker 3 (16:15):
Yeah, I would expect it to do the real world Yanks.

Speaker 2 (16:17):
All right, More coming up the Rod and Greg Show
on Talk Radio one oh five nine. Knrs Wayne Piterhauser.

Speaker 1 (16:23):
He's heading up the Utah Homeless He's a Utah Homeless
Services coordinator and they're making headlines right now doing some stuff.

Speaker 2 (16:30):
Well, they announced a couple of days ago that they
have found a spot where they hope to build a
homeless services campus site. Kind of interesting approach apparently has
been done in other cities. And Wayne is joining us
on our news maker line right now. Wayne, explain this
and how it will work.

Speaker 10 (16:45):
Yeah, thanks Rod. The genesis of the campus has been
over the last several winners, we've been providing five hundred
to almost one thousand additional temporary beds through the winner
and into the sun. So we know we need more
shelter just to accommodate what we've been doing on a

(17:06):
temporary basis.

Speaker 11 (17:08):
We also have looked.

Speaker 10 (17:11):
Across the country as several campus models in San Antonio
and Reno that it worked real well having services and
shelter located at the same location. So this has been
the motivation towards finding some land sufficient to create a

(17:32):
campus for homelessness.

Speaker 1 (17:35):
So, Wayne, I want to share with our listeners that
you were present your president, Senate president, when I was
Speaker of the House. We did so much work together.
You're you are effective public servant. But this space of
the homeless services and and you helping with the state
and leading the state in this effort, when did you
become gandhi?

Speaker 3 (17:54):
When did this?

Speaker 7 (17:55):
Like? Why?

Speaker 1 (17:56):
I mean, I know you liked to ski, and you've
got a lot of hobbies, and you have a you
were very good at what you did in the legislature.
You were hurting cats as well. But why did why
did you take this on?

Speaker 3 (18:05):
And tell me? Is it going the way you planned?

Speaker 1 (18:09):
Is it is? I maybe you have to get to
heaven somehow, and maybe this was the way you did it.
I don't know, but how is it going? I just
want to know generally how you feel about I have
a specific question, but I want to know generally how
you feel about things are since you took the helm
with the state leading this effort.

Speaker 3 (18:24):
It's a tough one. This is a very tough issue,
you know.

Speaker 10 (18:26):
Yeah, thanks Greg, and you know it well because you
led that charge when we were together in the legislature.
But it is extremely difficult. It's a lot more difficult
than I thought. But we've had some major successes with
creating additional housing, additional shelter. We know we need services,

(18:48):
we know we need to get people in a pathway
of recovery, and this is going to require effective programming.
So you know, this is our focus up. But it's
going to take resources. Yes, and I'll have to say
Greg that this is what we were doing is easier

(19:08):
than what I'm doing.

Speaker 1 (19:10):
Yes, I would imagine. So I saw you on TV.
There was a newscast and you were you were part
of a public hearing. And my memory of those types
of public hearings is that when we were there to
try to tell the public what was going on, you
get people that come to public hearings like that.

Speaker 3 (19:27):
It's almost self selection.

Speaker 1 (19:28):
You're looking at people that are that are thought leaders,
they're paying attention to issues around their neighborhood. There they'll
spend an evening to come and hear from people from
the state, or they're elected officials from the city and so.
But when we talked about homeless homelessness issue and all
all the crime, all the things that were associated to it.
With it, people were very supportive on the thirty thousand

(19:48):
foot view of how you addressed it. As soon as
I would mention and we think we might have a
facility here in this neighborhood, Well then that's when I
got eerily quiet. Okay, all of the support, all the interest,
all the communal we need to get rally around these people,
help people. Everything changed, and all of a sudden people

(20:09):
looked and said, oh, we like that. We just didn't
want any of that here where we live. How do
you combat that? I mean, at that meeting I saw
in the news look like it was a packed house.
You're you're so thorough in your descriptions, and I know
that you're you know that you're very methodical. Did were
you able to persuade the residents that were there to
talk about this new facility?

Speaker 3 (20:29):
How did that meeting go?

Speaker 4 (20:32):
Well?

Speaker 10 (20:32):
We have deep respect for the neighborhood there, and we
understand completely that this is this is a challenge for them.
But we feel like based on what we've have worked
on over the last couple of years, providing additional mitigation
funds around the current resource centers and having a more

(20:56):
safety first approach to alter that's inside and outside, because
we want the neighborhood to be safe, and so we
completely respect the concerns of those that were there the
other night, appreciate their comments. We encourage them to continually

(21:21):
to continue to be vigilant because this needs to be
a safe facility for all.

Speaker 2 (21:29):
When you mentioned I think you mentioned San Antonio and
I think you mentioned Rino as well have similar setups.
What is making their six success and can you do
the same thing here in Salt Lake?

Speaker 10 (21:41):
Yeah, we can and have in many ways. You know,
our current system is a lot better it was several
years ago because of this more focus on safety. When
we did our micro shelters on Fifth South and seventh West,

(22:01):
we had a lot of neighboring businesses and people that
were really concerned. And when we decided to increase the
shelters here a couple of months ago, they had no
concerns anymore because what had happened was what was once
an area where there was a lot of people that

(22:24):
were camping and doing things. We now replaced it with
a nice micro shelter facility. The impacts have virtually gone away.
And I think if there's a focus on this safety,
on the safety concepts, we can provide a facility.

Speaker 11 (22:45):
That we'll be safe for the.

Speaker 10 (22:47):
Neighboring, the neighbors around, and for people in the campus.

Speaker 1 (22:51):
Yeah, and I think that is the key because I
think that the drug dealers, the human and the drug
and human traveickers. The more you have a presence of security,
but also getting to know who the people are, that's
like kryptonite to criminals. They don't want you to know
who they are. They tend to stay away from secure
areas like that, where you're getting to know people drilled
down on their needs. That seems to be the key.

(23:14):
So do you think that what you said funding? But
do you think that the security means more than just
more police or things like that. It's really about how
you get to know each and every person that's in
that area. Is that attainable in a large facility like
the one that you're planning.

Speaker 10 (23:30):
Yeah, It's been proven in other areas like San Antonio
and Reno. And what we're doing right now with having
a bigger police presence in the area around our resource
centers is making those areas a lot safer than they've

(23:50):
been when they didn't have those resources. So you know,
it's paramount that we have a budget for public safety
and security and have the right response so that those
impacts are reduced.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
Wayne Niederhauser, he is Utah's homeless services coordinator, talking about
a homeless camp here in the state of Utah. More
coming up on The Rodden Gregg Show.

Speaker 3 (24:14):
We got a lot to talk about in the next hour.

Speaker 2 (24:16):
So, well, governor was out of town. So every time
he's out of town, what's he do?

Speaker 1 (24:20):
He runs the rip on Republican Republicans. There's a pattern here.
We'll get into it in the next hour. But yeah,
there's a story, national story that we'll break down between.

Speaker 2 (24:31):
The lines of what he's saying. Folks, we'll get into
that a whole lot. More coming up our number two
of the Rotting Gregg Show.

Speaker 1 (24:37):
Honest way, canteress on all every presets, But I do
have another preset. It's the Casey case in Top forty
that I like to listen to in my downtime. And
depending on the week of the show, I like the
eighties as you might you do. Yeah, and boy if

(24:58):
I if I strike on that it's like a time machine.

Speaker 3 (25:00):
I just love it.

Speaker 2 (25:02):
Well, we've got you know this and how we're where
we always help and open the phones to people. We
had a lot of discussion this week, yes a lot
of calls yesterday about the vaccine debate.

Speaker 3 (25:12):
Very good discussion.

Speaker 2 (25:12):
I want to play this audio sound by our good
friend Harry Anton. Yes from CNN had some new numbers
on the popularity of Robert F. Kendi Jr. Okay, Now,
yesterday he had quite the confrontation with certain members of
the Senate committee he was appearing before. There are even
some Republicans who are a little jittery about this guy, which.

Speaker 3 (25:31):
I don't get.

Speaker 1 (25:32):
I don't understand it because I think the guy is
an absolute soldier for the cause. And when I say cause,
I mean our healthy So I'm surprised and disappointed that
Republicans have an issue with him.

Speaker 2 (25:43):
Well, there are people out there, who are you know,
in some polls indicating he's not very popular. Uh, oh,
not the case. Listen to what Harry Enton with CNN
explained the latest research into the popularity of the various
cabinet members.

Speaker 12 (25:55):
What are we talking about here farh ratings of key
Trump officials look at this. R K Junior ain't exactly popular,
but he's the most popular of all the key officials
that we have recent polling on Pete hex Seth his
net favorable minus fourteen points. Jd Vance minus eleven, Marco
Rubios cent RK Juniors at minus seven but minus seven beats,
minus ten beats, minus eleven beats, minus fourteen. So no,

(26:18):
RK Junior is not a drag.

Speaker 9 (26:20):
I'm President Trump.

Speaker 12 (26:20):
He's not the most in battled. In fact, he is
the most popular official in Trump's cabinet, at least according to.

Speaker 2 (26:27):
The poem, most popular official in the tron kevinet according
to the latest polls.

Speaker 1 (26:31):
So let me let me tell you about public service,
and at least my view of it. Okay, if if
there is something that is going to be measurable that's
going to improve our lives, it needs to change from
the status quot. The status quo is not serving us
and we have to change it. And changing the status
quot is immensely hard. You have a lot of people
that protect the status quo, a lot of people make
money from the status quo. There's a lot of turf

(26:53):
around the status quo.

Speaker 2 (26:54):
On so many issues.

Speaker 3 (26:55):
On every issue. I don't know it's a single public policy.

Speaker 1 (26:57):
Issue where the status quot doesn't have legion of those
that profit control the status quo and never want it touched.
So when you go and you decide I'm going to
change the status quo, it is inherently going to be unpopular.
You are going to be attacked from every side that
wants to not change it. They're not going to say, hey,
we want the status quo. They're going to go after
you on your personal integrity. They're going to go after

(27:19):
the fear of the unknown. They're going to do everything
they can to preserve their turf and the status quo.
So just know that just baked into the equation that
if you're one of Donald Trump's cabinet members, you're not
going to be popular. And the reason because you're changing
things that not one administration, Republican or Democrat prior to
this one has ever been able to change. They might

(27:40):
have even aspired to change it until they got swallowed
up by that deep state. Well, the change that we
are seeing right now is true reform, and that reform
is going to come with a lot of negativity. But
what's brilliant is they're not running for the next term.
They're not running for the next thing. They are there
to make a difference, and they're not living in dying
by these They are going to make the change that

(28:03):
they came into that administration to make. And these all
these cabinet members, I believe uniquely have the leadership skills
and that I think the thick skin to make it happen.
But when you see it, they're unpopular. Just know they're
over the target.

Speaker 2 (28:17):
Well you touched on what is going on with Donald
Trump and his administration from the very start changing the
status quo. Yes, nobody. There's not a politician out there
who has the guts to shake things up. No, there
hasn't been for a long long time. So Donald Trump,
who's not a politician, he's a transactional character, made a

(28:37):
deal with the American people. You elect me and all
shake things up. And that's exactly what he's doing. I mean,
look at it. Look it great. Look what he's done
to the EPA. Look what he's done to education. Look
what he's done to immigration. Look what he's done to
foreign policy. Look what he's done to the Department of Defense,
which is now the Department of war. Yep, he is shit.
And then he puts the UFC fighting on the grounds

(28:59):
off the White House, which.

Speaker 1 (29:02):
Yeah, I'm okay, it's fine, he can do that. I
here's what I love about him. And by the way,
the Department of War, for a president that has no
interest in seeing US engage in war, is absolutely brilliant
because this is what he's doing. We defend this country.
Our Department of War is meant to tell the world

(29:22):
if you mess with our country, if you threaten our
country in any way, shape or form, know that we
are planning that war today to stop you from ever
harming us as a country. What it is not is
the social engineering under this broad this big umbrella called defense,
where that has been used with NGOs and everything else
to just get inside and nation build and mess with

(29:44):
other countries. The Department of War is to protect the
United States of America. And I do not think it's
inconsistent that a president that doesn't want to engage in
wars or nation build calls that department what it is
to narrow its focus to what it should have always been,
and that is to protect this country.

Speaker 2 (30:00):
If you want an example of that, look to him
the other day. With the attack on the Venzuelan boat. Okay,
I mean think about this, Donald Trump. All of us
realize there is there is poison coming into this country
and affecting so many people and changing so many lives,
ending so many lives. Weren't a war against that? That's right,
against the cartels. Nobody has ever tried to stop them.

(30:21):
Donald Trump says, I'm going to do it. And what
does he do with the Department of War again, you know,
let's declare war on the cartels, which I think we
basically have. And we're going to give you an example
of what we need. You put a boat in the
water from Venzuela coming to the United States carrying drugs.
We're going to take it out, you know. And that's
what Donald Trump is doing. He said, I Am going

(30:43):
to do everything I can do to protect the American people.
And that's exactly what he's trying to do right now.

Speaker 1 (30:49):
And if you have any doubt that these cartels that
they are the boss and Maduro who sounds like a
pharmaceutical ad the dictator out of Venezuela.

Speaker 3 (30:58):
Duro is there pawn or he's their employee.

Speaker 1 (31:02):
Uh, just know that that he just sent Maduro just
sent jets, fighter jets to fly by naval vessels off
of their coast. And so the connection between the Venezuelan
government and this dictator Maduro and these cartels, they just
married that. So if you if you wondered if that
country was sponsoring these cartels, that that aggressive action by

(31:25):
those fighter jets. By the way, the Navy they let
them come by, and I'm sure they saw everything they
wanted to see about those planes when they came by,
because you're not going to get near those naval vessels
and still be able to go back home if the
Navy decided to. But the fact that he even sent
those out there as a country towards our vessels shows
that the hand and glove relationship between Venezuela, its dictator,

(31:46):
and these cartels that are trying to funnel this so
much so that even John I hate to say it,
but John Fetterman, the smartest Democrat maybe in the Senate
right now, points out that overdosing is taking a hunt
thousand plus American lives every year, and these cartels and
these countries are waging this against our country. It's time
to join the fight against that. And that's that that

(32:08):
should not even be a partisan issue. We should just
instinctively want to do that and think about how intuitive
that is. But how much reform it takes to even
be able to raise the stakes like that.

Speaker 2 (32:19):
And again, Donald Trump putting the Democrats in a corner.
How do they say, well, we need to defend these
drug runners. People want to use drugs, they have rights
to use drugs in this country. Well, he's in courn
How do they respond?

Speaker 1 (32:31):
So the New York Times, the headline is Trump claims
the power to summarily kill suspected drug smugglers. The headline
which would suggest that he is acting cavalierly, that he
is acting without authority. Uh, that we've just described that
this is all the same. This is this is a
this is a country, a hostile country, and cartel that

(32:51):
that's sending in poison into this country to profit and
to kill our people.

Speaker 2 (32:54):
We've got a lot out there for you to think
about today, but I'd love to get your thoughts. We'd
love to get your thoughts. A matter of fact, on
the President deciding to change it from Department of Defense
to the Department of War. Yes, eight eight eight five
seven eight zero one zero eight eight eight five seven
O eight zero one zero on your cell phone dial
pound two fifty, and on our talkback line you can
leave a message as well. More coming up on the

(33:15):
Rod and Gregg Show. Do you find a pattern here? Greg,
you followed this for a long long time, as have
I so our great governor Spencer Cox, when he goes
out of town, apparently he's that gives him the freedom
to smash and go after Utah Republicans. It's a pattern.
He doesn't do it here because he knows he knows
if he does it here, people will pick up on

(33:37):
it and let him have it. But when he goes
out of town, like to Washington, yes, all of a
sudden he can be a critic raised question. You have
to read between the lines to what he's saying. But
he always does this when he goes out of town,
and he usually is attacking Utah Republicans.

Speaker 1 (33:53):
One of the things that the governor and you know
this is I've begun. I don't think he does it
as much now as he had early on in his
public service. But even if he was in town, if
he was being interviewed by MSNBC, of which he took
ample opportunity to be interviewed on that network or CNN.
Judging from his crowd, he would be very critical of

(34:16):
fellow Republicans. And you know that liberals love when it's
Republican on Republican violence. That's where you know, McCain was
so popular when he was when he was ripping on
you know, George W.

Speaker 3 (34:26):
Bush.

Speaker 1 (34:27):
He was a straight talk express, he was a maverick.
As soon as he ran against Obama, he became the
enemy again. And the same with Mitt Romney. They hated
Mitt Romney when he ran against Obama. Then when he
started ripping on Trump, he became the greatest guy in
the world. And so if you want media accolades, all
you have to do is republican is tear down or
criticize your own party. And so this article came out

(34:49):
and in its he's there with the Democratic.

Speaker 2 (34:53):
National Press Club, with the Governor of Maryland.

Speaker 1 (34:55):
Wes Moore, and so this is these are these bipartisan moments,
so to speak. But they're asking about how frail our
democracy is, our democratic republic, and I do agree with
them that everybody thinks that what they're living through could
be the worst ever. And he's trying to put it
in perspective. We've had a civil war. It's not that bad.
But he does caution that we have to be careful
with the public's confidence. But in doing that, it comes across,

(35:19):
especially when we're in the throes of a judge that
has thrown out our congressional maps and the talk of
the ballot measure that was given a super statute status
by our state Supreme Court, that nothing else has. It
sounds like when he's saying, you got to listen to
the voice of the people. You can read the comments
he's made or listen to his comments, and they sound

(35:42):
very critical of us here in Utah or our Republicans
elected Republicans in the state.

Speaker 2 (35:47):
Well, apparently, according to this article, this is a reporting
that was done in one of the news media outlets here,
the governor was asked about the redistrict team that is
taking place here in the state of Utah and around
the country. You first of all said that he said,
I hate Jerry Man. That's what he said. It's been
done ever since the dawn of time, hasn't it, But
he hates it.

Speaker 3 (36:06):
Well, beauty's in the eye of the beholder.

Speaker 2 (36:08):
Yeah, yeah, he acted, Yeah, he he you know, he's
not running for a particular district. He's running state wide.
You can't Jerrymander state wide.

Speaker 13 (36:15):
Racist.

Speaker 1 (36:15):
Yeah, and that's not going to happen in Utah. I mean,
we don't have grasshopper looking or praying mantis looking districts
like they have also.

Speaker 2 (36:22):
But then he goes on and says, I I will say,
we risk as the Republican Party of Utah not listening
to people. That's why this has gotten them so fired
up because they did run an initiative. They felt like
they're being ignored. And there is nothing in the history
of our country that make people angrier, that makes them

(36:43):
lose trust in government when they feel like the government
is not being responsive to them. Did the governor look
at the results of that proposition and see where most
of the support came for that? I bet he did
know he didn't he did look at the votes and
how that how that was approved.

Speaker 3 (36:58):
And folks, here's what I want to tell you.

Speaker 1 (37:00):
I when I was on the clock, I know, I
don't want to it was a while ago. I've had
what how many twenty eighteen was the last session I
was a part of. But we do take when I
was in the legislative branch. We took these ballot measures
incredibly seriously. In fact, we fought to stop Obamacare from
being in this state. It's one of the hardest political

(37:21):
fights we in the House made. We had a Republican governor,
Herbert that wanted it, we had a Senate that wanted it.
We fought against it more socialized medicine.

Speaker 3 (37:28):
We won. We stopped it.

Speaker 1 (37:30):
A ballot measure comes paid by by the hospitals who
are going to get tons of money from the federal
government for Obamacare expansion, and by ballot measure, it's the
law of the land today. Nobody wiped it out, and
it was one of the hardest fights to try and
prevent that from coming to our state. It's the law
today as by a ballot measure. These ballot measures, I
never took them lightly. I never looked out. I don't
care if someone passes it, we'll just amend it and

(37:52):
change it. And I don't think that's what's going on
right now. But so I think that what was passed
by a ballot measure, you see. I think it's still
the process that they're working on right now. There are
some changes made, like any law will have changes, But
for the governor to talk about the ballot measure and
listening to the people, Let's talk about our elections generally.
Let's talk about mass mailing, unsolicited mass mailing of ballots

(38:16):
to voters. His lieutenant governor has said, there's nothing to
see here, folks. This has done perfectly. There is the
chain of custody is fine, the transparency. Is there anybody
who would question it wants to tear down our democratic
elective process that I think that Utah's feel more ignored
on the ballot the election integrity issue than anything and

(38:38):
minimally the governor should acknowledge that even his office. If
he's saying that the legislative branch might be tone deaf
to the will of the people, how you can run
that these elections the way we're running them in the
state of Utah and imagine that you're on the side
of angels on your executive branch and the legislative branch
is the one that's callous to the voice of the people.

Speaker 3 (38:57):
I just don't I don't agree. Yeah, I just don't agree.

Speaker 2 (39:01):
Well, he says trusting government is failing. Read between the lines.
He means trust is failing because of Republicans here in Utah.

Speaker 1 (39:08):
I think Republicans are running the state, so I mean
Republicans are a super majority, so there's no one else
to point that finger out.

Speaker 2 (39:15):
All right, we want to get to some phone calls tonight.
It is thank Rod and Greg is Friday eight eight
eight five seven eight zero one zero cell phone dial
pound two fifty and download the iHeartRadio up and listcanarrest
dot com and leave us a talkback message as well.
We'll get to your comments coming up next.

Speaker 1 (39:31):
Department of Defense changing. President has changed the name of
Department of Defense to Department of War War, and it
really does focus what that department is meant to do,
what its objectives are.

Speaker 3 (39:41):
I like it.

Speaker 1 (39:43):
It doesn't mean you're going to go to war all
the time, but it means we're not going to nation
build all over the planet either. And then we're also
talking about a curious exchange that Governor Cox had out
of state at a national Governor Associations Press commerce. He's
shouldered to shoulder with Maryland's Democrat governor more and you're
talking about the confidence that Americans have in their elected officials,

(40:05):
and he kind of threw some shade over here at
Utah and it's elected officials. And I think it's a
little unmerited, but or it should include himself in that
if you're going to talk about Utah voters and their
confidence and their elected officials. However, so we got those
two topics, but we asked you, you know, comment on
what you'd like. What say you, folks. So we have
a caller waiting. Kobe from Grantsville has been patiently waiting. Kobe,

(40:28):
thank you for holding. Welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 13 (40:33):
Thank you. Yeah, second time caller.

Speaker 3 (40:34):
I love it, Thanks for coming.

Speaker 13 (40:36):
Hey, just send a question. So I know there's been
a lot of department changes and rebrand or renaming and everything.
I'm kind of curious how this is my first question.
If we have time for a second question, then so
be it. But how much money is involved in rebranding
and having to redo all the documents and everything for
these department changes say or know or come out of taxes?

Speaker 2 (40:58):
Well, the President to address that today, especially on the
Department of the Department of War change that's taking place.
He said, we are going to hold the cost down
as much as we possibly can. We aren't changing all
the stationary We'll use what we have. I'm not sure
Greg has been through this before, he has some information
on this, but I think he will try and hold
down the cost as much as he can. But yes,

(41:20):
taxpayers will probably pay for Kobe.

Speaker 1 (41:22):
There's that inherent cost of changing the name. But sometimes
when you find that people don't want to change names,
that they will attach a really really high cost to
what that would be.

Speaker 3 (41:32):
We saw it in the state. I'll give you an example.

Speaker 1 (41:36):
If you're getting rid of DEI and universities and they say,
do you know how many DEI logos and things we have?
And you know the cost of what you're trying to
the department you're trying to eliminate. I think sometimes that's
a tactic, but it is certainly frugally frugal and a
fiscal conservative that stares at that bottom line. And I
guarantee you, Kobe, that if you and I saw what

(41:57):
they said it would cost to change the name, you
and I would do it for a fraction of that
and we'd make money doing it.

Speaker 2 (42:03):
Okay, another question, Kobe.

Speaker 13 (42:05):
Yeah, absolutely, yeah, if you have time for just a comment.
I currently have a really close friend he's working in
one of the departments. I can't satisfy, which one basically restructuring,
telling them the correct way to do all their technology
and everything. Just a comment. I agree with the Doge
thing and all that Elon Musk and everyone did to help,

(42:27):
you know, clean out all the corruption and everything. Just
a comment. I really wish that they would have done
more vetting. After hearing a different side of the whole thing,
it sounds like they just shredded departments, just took out
tons of people that were still doing good things, and
you know, there's a bunch of empty chairs that really
should still be there. I've always been like pro doge,

(42:47):
but it's kind of sad to see there's just been
no vetting or you know, a gradual decline. It kind
of feels like what Biden did with the whole energy thing.
You know, hey, we're just going to stop production instantly
with no plan, and I guess that just kind of
bugs me a little bit. I love Trump to love
what he's done, but I just really wish there would
have been more vetting and a plan rather than just
day one Air's kitchen. Think we're going to start.

Speaker 1 (43:09):
So we can ask you a quick question, just front
row seat hearing that do you think that is systemic
throughout all, or do you think there's just some critical
areas where this was done maybe to haphazardly or not
betting enough, or do you think that would it's broader.
I'm just curious, I because it's interesting when you get
that kind of inside look that we all don't have.

Speaker 13 (43:30):
From what I've heard, it sounds like it's every department.
It sounds like they just went in and just fired
everyone in every department, and some you know, there are
different varying degrees of it, but I just I just
kind of like that's the wrong way. As Republicans and conservatives,
we usually do things the right way, the smart way.

Speaker 2 (43:50):
So anyway, I agree, all right, all right, Kobe, thank you.
You know I was thinking to that Carl, with the
sides of the federal government, Yeah, maybe the only way
to tackle this shock and awe. Well, I mean it
is and I see what Kobe is saying, But if
you're having to go through systematically with as big as
everything is in Washington, could you get that done in

(44:12):
four years? Five years? It takes forever.

Speaker 1 (44:15):
Well see the part that That's why I want to
ask Kobe about that narrative, because, after all, of that.
We still see some of these people that need to
be let go. This Hegseeth just announced that he was
letting go of this person that was in charge of
DEI Health inside in the Pentagon or something. And there's
some people that when the president gets elected and they

(44:35):
want to make those changes, they are just dead set
against it. So it's it's I think it's a pretty
tough task what they're doing.

Speaker 2 (44:42):
It is very very hard, and yes, could it be
more systematic, maybe so, but boy, you got to get
it done, folks, And you can't just sit around and
think about it or analyze it every time you turn around.
More coming up the Rod and Greg Show and Talk
Radio one oh five nine. Okay, anteress, is it time
to eradicate transgenderism? No, we are talking about taking all
trans killing them. Oh we aren't doing that, folks. But

(45:04):
we are talking about public policy, and we'll get into
that coming up in the sixth Cora. Right now, we're
talking about a number of issues, including, you know, things
we spoke about earlier this week, vaccines, elderly people, driving,
comments being made by the governor, the announcement by the
President today on you know, the Department of War, let's
go back to the phone. See what you have to say.

(45:24):
Tonight in Cedar Hills. We're talking with David tonight on
the Roden Greg Show.

Speaker 14 (45:28):
Hi David, Hello, I just wanted to call in regarding
yesterday's called by a pediatrician.

Speaker 2 (45:37):
Yes, yes, on vaccine. Yeah yeah, go ahead.

Speaker 14 (45:40):
And he ripped. He ripped on Greg about his stands
with regards to vaccines. I remember that, and uh yeah,
I'll bet uh. Anyway, bottom line is I deal with
through my wife. I deal with doctors all the time.
I started away from doctors as much as possible myself,

(46:03):
but she's going through stage four cancer and the pharmaceutical
world is one discipline and there are other disciplines and
it bothers me.

Speaker 15 (46:14):
I heard earlier on earlier show where the doctor called
in was speaking and he said, I graduated from Harvard
Medical School. He said, recently I did a deeper dive
into vaccines and other medications, and he said, I could
not believe what I did not know with regards to

(46:35):
vaccine research that has been done. This doctor that spoke
to you yesterday, he's speaking from a discipline, a learning
that he has, and he knows what he knows but
he doesn't know what he doesn't know. There are machines
that you can that you can test your body.

Speaker 11 (46:54):
With that.

Speaker 15 (46:57):
Tell amazing things and divulge certain things happening once with.

Speaker 13 (47:04):
Energy flowing your bodies and.

Speaker 15 (47:05):
Body and everything else. I'm just saying that I am
not one that believes worshiping at the ultar of the DRS.

Speaker 2 (47:18):
All Right, David, thank you for your coming. You know what,
Greg and I understand what David is saying. I think
this is good with what's going on in this country
right now, talking about vaccines, questioning vaccines. You know, we
believed for so long that everybody had these vaccines. You know,
in a way, like Kennedy said, we're the sickest country
in the world right now. What are these vaccines doing

(47:39):
for us? Thickest country?

Speaker 1 (47:41):
And I know I appreciate when callers hear we say
something and they want to correct the record. And there's
been times where i've I've it's been really helpful to
get a better perspective of everything that's going on. The
thing that I asked the pediatrician to call that was
concerned about the number of vaccines I was, I was saying,
and look, these are I'm recalling these from from memory
and in some town hall meetings I had years ago,

(48:02):
but also data I've read. But one of the things
that he was saying is that that he felt that
the science was settled and that these had gone through
the clinical studies, and that any question of their efficacy
or their harm would be more rumor than actually substantiated. Well,
in the testimony that Secretary Kennedy gave to Congress to

(48:23):
the Senate yesterday, he cited specific studies from Fulton County,
Georgia and Atlanta that was that were never reported, that
were never published. And I just invite anyone that any
of our listeners that have an interest in this issue
to maybe go back to that and find, as Elon
Musk encourages all of us, let's look at source material

(48:45):
and get to the bottom of this. And I do
think there's a lot more we don't know what we
don't know. I agree with David our caller on that
there is a lot we don't know, and that we
should be open to new information when we get it.

Speaker 2 (48:56):
Hey, quick, don't before we break Delta air Line hub
here in Salt Lake City. Guess what they guess what
The President announced yesterday what Delta air Lines will officially
use Gulf of Mexico Gulf of America in its manuals.
From here on out, they're changing them all and they
will call that big body of water out there the
Gulf of America, not the Gulf of Mexico.

Speaker 1 (49:17):
I would I just assumed that was the case, since
I think they're a little behind the curve. But good,
I'm glad they're getting with it.

Speaker 2 (49:23):
Yeah, they're, they're they're they're picking up on it.

Speaker 3 (49:25):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (49:25):
Yeah, so has Rip done it yet? They remember, they
were't allowed to come to anything until they got it right.

Speaker 2 (49:31):
And they probably won't knowing the ap All right, we've
got another full hour coming your way as you work
your way home on this Friday evening right here on
Utah's Talk Radio one oh five dine k n RS.
Stay with us, all right, let's talk more about what

(49:54):
happened in Minneapolis. Joining us on our newsmaker line. Always
great to have John Daniel Davidson from The Federalist joining us.
He wrote an article this week the headline, John, I
have to tell you scared me a little bit because
you said it's time to eradicate transgenderism. From public life.
You aren't talking about getting all rid of all the
trans people, are you, John.

Speaker 11 (50:14):
No, I'm not, and I explained that explicitly in the piece.
You know that headlines are supposed to grab people's attention. No,
the argument is that transgenderism is an ideology. It's a
dangerous ideology, and we should treat it like we've treated
dangerous ideologies in the past, the way we treated communism
in the nineteen fifties or Islamic jihadism after nine to eleven.

(50:38):
We need to recognize that the ideology of transgenderism and
the entire sort of industrial complex of transgenderism is dangerous
for American society, and we need to start acting like
it instead of, you know, playing this very foolish game
of pretending that you know, transgender under ideology can coexist

(51:02):
or is somehow compatible with the free society.

Speaker 1 (51:04):
It's not, you know, John, Years and years ago, I
was a school board member of a charter school and
we confronted a situation where we had a student with
gender dysphor you and the accommodation that was asked to
the board was is there a quiet, private place that
this student would be able to use the restroom, but
it was intensely private. It certainly wasn't a political issue.
It was nothing you would put on banners or that

(51:27):
anybody wanted to the parents or the child didn't, the
student didn't want to draw attention to themselves as they
were struggling with some issues.

Speaker 3 (51:36):
When we handled that, the.

Speaker 1 (51:37):
Emotion and trying to make sure students felt okay, it
did not feel like it feels today now we talk,
we're talking. It feels political, it feels aggressive. It isn't accommodation.
It's you know, boys that can be in girls bathrooms.
If we have these problems, isn't it the case that
we should look at it as a disorder, something that's

(51:58):
going wrong with a child, And until they're an adult,
all you can do is try to support them in
in a loving way. But none of that includes political
signs and banners and you know a lot of publicity.

Speaker 3 (52:09):
Am I seeing that right?

Speaker 7 (52:12):
Yeah?

Speaker 11 (52:12):
It also doesn't include lying to them and affirming them
in a dangerous delusion and encouraging them to seek treatments
and social transitions and in some cases surgeries that are irreversible.
That's the least supportive, least compassionate thing that we could
possibly do for young men and women, especially who are

(52:33):
confused about their sex or who are suffering from gender dysphoria.
We need to treat it like a mental illness. And
I have to say, if a young man or a
young woman is so uncomfortable in their body and is
so confused about the reality of their sex that they're
not able to go to the bathroom in the bathroom

(52:54):
that corresponds to their sex, then they probably are not
in a position to be able to even like go
to school. They need to get help. They need to
get serious, intensive help. They're suffering from deep and serious
psychological and emotional problems that need to be addressed before
we can think about, you know, how to accommodate them

(53:15):
in a school setting. This is one of the cruelest
things I think that we've done culturally is affirm young
people in this dangerous delusion and set them on a
road to destruction.

Speaker 2 (53:28):
John, what do you make of the manifesto the shooter
in Minneapolis left where he's talking about he felt brainwashed?
You know, this trans thing was really troubling in what
kind of a message does that send out to the
country And is anyone going to pay attention to it.

Speaker 11 (53:42):
John Well, obviously the Democrats are not going to pay
attention to the first thing that they did was near
at the children who were killed and wounded while they
were praying at Mass. And the second thing they did
was to you know, warn about you know, hate for
transgender people. That that was the real problem in all this,

(54:05):
not the fact that this young man was brainwashed. In
his manifesto, he said he brainwashed himself, but we know
that that in reality, he was brainwashed by internet culture,
by mainstream corporate culture, by the news media, probably by
his teachers and parents. At least his mother in this
case signed off on a court order that legally changed

(54:29):
his name when he was still a minor. So the
brainwashing is happening to these young people, and we have
allowed that to happen as a society, and we need
to do a one to eighty on this and realize
that affirming people in these delusions creates misery for them,
and it creates, you know, in some ways. This this

(54:49):
shooter in Minneapolis, Robert West I believe his name it was,
is a textbook example of the kinds of psycho logical
and emotional and spiritual damage that we do to young
people when we affirm them in these delusions about transgenderism.

Speaker 1 (55:07):
You know, and I thought that this manifesto that this student,
I think, by a chance, we should have never seen
it because the regime media and others would have hid
that if he didn't post it on YouTube, and it
was captured before they took it off, So we know
a lot more. We get a lot more insight on
this than we usually do. When he when the when
this mass murderer said that, you know, he was set,
he was upset that he was brainwashed. He was seventeen

(55:28):
at the time, which he was a miner. He's a minor,
and we're not really expecting miners to make those lifelong decisions.
What happens in the growth in the coming years, with
all the with all the hormone treatments and all the
surgeries and all that's been happening over the last five
years or longer, what do we have upon us. Are
we going to see an increase in violence? Are we

(55:49):
going to see an increase in people who realize their
lives might be at a dead end or something become
very violent, or is it already amongst happening right now?
But it's being hidden. What what does the future look
like given what we.

Speaker 3 (56:00):
Know right now.

Speaker 11 (56:01):
I think we're going to reap the whirlwind on this.
You know, what we've done to young people and the
way that we'd have propagandized them and encouraged them in
this diabolical lie is going to have really really bad consequences.
You know, five, ten, fifteen years down the line, when
these young people, you know, many of them children now,

(56:24):
are now adults and realize that they've been lied to,
that they if they're a man, that they'll never become
a woman. If they're a woman, they'll never become man.
They won't even be able to pass for a member
of the opposite sex, and they'll have realized that they
were lied to. I think that's part of what drove
this young man into this sort of demonic rage that

(56:46):
motivated him to kill innocent children at the school, the
Catholic school he used to attend. We saw the same
thing in Nashville last year with a woman who was
under a transgender delusion go and attack her former school
and kill children there before police were able to get
to her. So I think that we're going to really

(57:06):
reap the whirlwind on this, and it should be a
warning to us that we need to do a one
to eighty on this right now as a society, and
Republicans and conservatives who are against this, who see the
issue clearly need to use every lever of political power
that they have to turn this thing around.

Speaker 2 (57:24):
Hope they do that. John is always great chatting with you.
Thank you, and enjoy the weekend. Thank you, John, thank you, Hey,
thank you so much. All right on our newsmaker line
that is John Daniel Davidson from the Federalist and Greg.
I hope we're turning the corner. I hope people are
waking up to this, But I don't know what's going
to take as long as you have an entire a
political party who continually pushes this. Yes, I don't know

(57:46):
if we can turn this around.

Speaker 1 (57:47):
We'll think about this. When we became when the border
was open, Yeah, you didn't know the day after they
Biden opened that border what we were going to feel
as a border state here. There was a lag. There's
a lag in terms of what you feel. And I'm
going to tell you that even if we were to
turn the corner today in twenty twenty five, in September.
What has happened in the years prior. I don't know

(58:08):
that we have felt that what's coming, and so I
do think there's a whirlwind, as our guests said that
we're going to reap over what's happened to these kids.

Speaker 2 (58:17):
All Right, We've got a lot more coming up our
number three of the Rotting Greg Show right here on
Utah's Talk Radio one O five to nine. Kayn Or s,
we were just talking with John Daniel Davidson from The
Federalist about transgenderism, and we want to continue that conversation
now because we came across this article written by our
next guest, and she talks about watching transgenderism ruin her

(58:38):
friend's lives. Her name is Brooke Branching, and she's joining
us on our newsmaker line from the Federalist. Brook, thank
you very much for joining us. Why did you decide
to write this article?

Speaker 7 (58:47):
Brook?

Speaker 4 (58:48):
So, this is an article that's actually very personal to me,
and it was a little bit different than what I'm
used to in journalism. But what I found was that
this particular article is something that strikes a chord with
a lot of people because transgenders into something that when
we talk about it. We often talk about it in

(59:10):
very technical terms, and we think about it as a
very medical procedure. But the reality of it is that
it is young people's lives that are being severely impacted
and horrendously changed in irreversible ways, and the reality and
the personality behind that needs to be addressed in this conversation.

Speaker 1 (59:31):
So this is a personal account, and so I think
our listeners would be very interested in hearing this from
a You know, we people can be good at math,
we can be analytical, but we really do make decisions
from our emotions, how we feel. And I think that
what you're sharing when you were fourteen looking confronting some
of these issues are important to discuss, and you're right,

(59:51):
we don't. So maybe you could share what did the
fourteen year old Brook see and feel when you are
seeing a classmate going through something like this.

Speaker 4 (01:00:01):
Well, at first it felt a little bit normal, because
the way that people transition is obviously in stages, and
it's something that gets kind of brought up slowly. So
at first one of my friends would come out as bisexual,
or they're gay, or they start dressing a little bit
more androgynously, and then over time it would develop, and

(01:00:24):
there was moments and there were certain instances where people
would be interested in starting like hormone replacement therapy or
start talking about having body mutilating surgeries. That kind of
raised red flags for me, and I didn't know exactly
what that was at the time, but inherently I knew
that this was a very uncomfortable and a very strange

(01:00:47):
way to approach our bodies. I didn't know how to
express that as I was going through high school. But
now that I'm a little bit older and I have
the ability to look back, hindsight has proven that that
was me understanding that that was a rejection of the
natural order.

Speaker 2 (01:01:04):
Brok, did you approach your friends and talk to him
about this? Was that difficult or did you realize something
was going on here? I mean, how did you approach
this with your friends?

Speaker 4 (01:01:14):
So what ended up happening was around twenty twenty, That's
when I graduated high school, was when a lot of
this came to a head and it became a much
more prevalent issue. But that was also the year that
COVID happened. So there was this huge kind of like
cut off from my friend group where I wasn't allowed
to see people. There was no place for us to go,

(01:01:36):
and so we all kind of had a little bit
of a difficult distance between one another. And it was
at that time that I started to change my politics
and my personality a little bit, because so much was
going on in the world that I became much more
aware of the liberal media's use of narratives to construction

(01:01:56):
situations that are not necessarily true. And as I'm the
personal we woke up to that, I started to disagree
with my friends, and I posted a picture online of
President Trump at one point, and almost all of my
friends immediately blocked me online, stopped talking to me, stopped

(01:02:16):
inviting me places, and I was virtually cut off and
cut out of their lives.

Speaker 3 (01:02:23):
Brooke, I'm so interested in this. You you grew up.

Speaker 1 (01:02:28):
You describe a very I would argue, a very typical
fourteen year old, you know, life in school. I think
that the kids your age, and I think this is
for a lot of people. The teachers are probably liberal
that certainly when you get to college, professors are your movies,
the people in the movies, and the television music everywhere

(01:02:48):
everywhere you look. You seem to have kind of a
left of center perspective. When you described that you started
to see things differently, Well, how did you acquire the
critical thinking to start to see what was going on?
Wasn't gelling with your core beliefs and things. Given that
the atmosphere for all young people right now seems to
be pretty indoctrinating in terms of the left media, you

(01:03:09):
name it. It's all really meant to go one direction. It
sounds like you want a different How did was there
an epiphany for you?

Speaker 4 (01:03:16):
One of the biggest things was actually Elon Musk's purchase
of Twitter, because as someone that spends a lot of
time on social media, like most young people do, that
was a big moment for me because I started to
see a lot of conservative voices that were being championed
and not being suppressed like I was on other platforms

(01:03:37):
like Facebook or Instagram. So being exposed to influencers that
were conservatives was very intriguing to me because even if
I didn't agree with them at first, the more exposure
that I had to them, the more I started to
change my own views and my own perspective. So seeing
people like Matt Walsh or Tucker Carlson at first really

(01:04:00):
pushing for different narratives. That was a big moment for me,
And regardless of what their politics are nowadays or what
they believe on certain issues, it opened my eyes and
it made me want to question people for the first
time in my.

Speaker 2 (01:04:14):
Life, Brook, have you got much pushback for writing this article?
And if so, what kind of pushback?

Speaker 4 (01:04:21):
Actually, the biggest response that I've had from people is
most people coming forward and sharing their stories about how
their children or their children's friends have also had these experiences,
or how they've watched loved ones go through these transitions
and have been enormously cut out of their lives.

Speaker 9 (01:04:43):
So it seems like this is.

Speaker 4 (01:04:44):
A movement of people that are almost left in the
wake of transgenderism, that maybe they themselves in transition but
saw the people around them be deeply impacted by it.
Because one of the things that we don't really think
about is that so when someone takes on a new
name and says, oh, my god given name is not

(01:05:06):
is a girl's name, and I'm a boy, so I'm
abandoning that. When they decide to use a new name,
they call that dead naming. And when you dead name someone,
you are so totally removed from their physical presence, that
the person that you grew up with, the person that
you raise, the person that you cared for and loved

(01:05:29):
for years, is all of a sudden gone and you
can't really get them back, and if you even remember
who they were before, they're angry at you. So there
is this massive emotional problem that so many people experience,
and it's really really difficult, I think, for families and
for friends to move forward even if they quote unquote

(01:05:53):
affirm their gender, because the person that they knew in
a previous life no longer.

Speaker 2 (01:05:58):
Exists for you, Brooke, any advice you offer to kids
who are fourteen, fifteen, sixteen years old right now and
seeing their friends transition and what you know how to
approach them, what to do, any advice you.

Speaker 4 (01:06:10):
Would offer, I would say the thing is to look
for trusted adults that you know will not affirm this
and can keep you safe. Because the way that this
spreads is through social media, and it spreads in also
physical social circles. If one of your kids' friends is transitioning,

(01:06:33):
there is a very high likelihood that your child will
see the attention that they're getting and be curious about
it and want to engage in it to some degree
because the victimhood role that you get to take on
is very exciting to a fourteen or a fifteen year old.
So if you are a young person, go talk to

(01:06:54):
your parents about this and let them know what's going on,
because this is a time for transparency with them, and
it's also a time in your life when you need
guidance and you need leadership.

Speaker 2 (01:07:05):
Brook, great advice, and thanks for a few minutes of
your time. Enjoyed the weekend, Brook.

Speaker 4 (01:07:08):
Thank you, gentlemen, have a great day.

Speaker 7 (01:07:10):
All right.

Speaker 2 (01:07:10):
On our newsmaker line, that's Brooke Branchin. She is with
a federalist talking about watching her friends transition. What a story,
What pressure that must be on these kids today.

Speaker 1 (01:07:19):
Yeah, an interesting approach where you're talking about before, the
time before with those friends and then seeing that happen,
what happened, yeah, instead of just the biology of it
all and what we see in the aftermath.

Speaker 2 (01:07:29):
Pretty amazing. All Right, We've got more to come. Our
listen Back Friday segments coming your way on the Friday
edition of The Rod and Greg Show and Talk Radio
one oh five nine knrs. All right, our list back
Friday segments. We do this every Friday as you work
your way home, we look back at the newsmakers and
the issues that we've talked about and select a couple
and play them back for you. The governor making remarks

(01:07:49):
I noticed yesterday, if I read between the lines, he's
basically seeing Republicans here in the state of Utah are
getting in the way of things, especially on the redistrict
teen issue. He says, do what the people want. Yeah,
that's what his argument it was. He didn't say Republicans,
but you read between the lines, I think that's what
he's saying.

Speaker 1 (01:08:07):
There's a broad issue here about the legislative equal and
separate powers, and then there's the weeds of the judge's
decision and the process going forward. Yeah, so you know,
unpacking that process going forward, I think is what we
should be talking about.

Speaker 2 (01:08:20):
Well, a lot of people here in the state think
this Utah judge really overstepped their judicial powers when it
comes to the redistricting issue and the whole Jerrymanderin issue.
And we had a chance to talk with someone you
know well, Greg and Corey Astell. He's president of the
Summit Institute for Lawn and Policy.

Speaker 3 (01:08:37):
Really bright guy is and he's really put it.

Speaker 1 (01:08:40):
I don't even know if the judge will seat as
simply as he sees it, but he is taking the
plain language of that decision and really laying out a
very straightforward case on how these maps can be presented
and we can continue to move forward tonight. I think
they added an extra week of process, which they needed
if you want to have some hearings with the public involved,
which you needed if you were going to do this.
Thirty days no amount of time for a serious redistricting.

(01:09:02):
So I think this was a very good interview. That's
why we want to play it again. But I think
there's a very easy plane language way forward.

Speaker 2 (01:09:11):
Yeah, well, let's listen to what Corey had to say.
We asked him first of all about his feelings about
the ruling and what went wrong.

Speaker 6 (01:09:16):
Absolutely, So I want to take one step back to
what the Utah Supreme Court.

Speaker 7 (01:09:20):
Decided about a year ago. So the court held that SB.

Speaker 6 (01:09:24):
Two hundred, which was the legislature's repeal of Proposition for
violated the constitutional right of the people to alter or
reform their government. This really was the court sort of
inventing a novel interpretation that's not really grounded in the
Constitution's original public meeting. And I think what's happening with
this District Court last week is basically she was following

(01:09:47):
that in those footsteps. So the Utah Constitution really treats
citizens' initiatives as ordinary statutes once enacted, and that would
mean it's subject to the legislature amending or repealing it.
But what the Utah Supreme Court did was create something
entirely different. It created this special protection, this entirely new

(01:10:07):
category of law whereby quote unquote, government reform initiatives are
treated differently basically as a superstatute, something more akin to
a constitutional.

Speaker 7 (01:10:19):
Amendment that can't be repealed or changed.

Speaker 6 (01:10:22):
Without a much more rigorous process and really a vote
to the people. And that's not at all what the
Constitution says or even implies. And honestly, the Court now
has placed itself in the center of attention because the
real question is now what qualifies as government reform. I
mean that could be a tax policy, it could be
environmental regulation. But the Court really is inviting endless litigation

(01:10:43):
on this question, putting itself right in the middle of it.
And what Judge Gibson last week, the District Court ruled
is essentially following in the Supreme Court's lead saying that.

Speaker 7 (01:10:54):
SB.

Speaker 6 (01:10:54):
Two hundred, the legislatures repeal and prop for, was unconstitutional
on this new precedent that the Utah Supreme.

Speaker 7 (01:11:02):
Court has now created.

Speaker 6 (01:11:03):
And she went a little bit further and even stipulated
that the legislature's maps were in violation.

Speaker 7 (01:11:08):
Of that precedent.

Speaker 6 (01:11:10):
Now, that issue wasn't briefed by the parties or raised
in and the pleading. So I mean, Judge Gibson's really
stepping out on a limb. That's not how courts usually
issue rulings. I think the legislature absolutely should appeal this decision,
but honestly, gentlemen, based on where the Utah Supreme Court
wants to take this, I'm not entirely sure that there's

(01:11:31):
a lot of hope that an.

Speaker 7 (01:11:32):
Appeal will win.

Speaker 6 (01:11:33):
And so what I wrote in the outf ed this
past week is essentially saying, assuming that what the Utah
Supreme Court has decided is basically going to be.

Speaker 7 (01:11:45):
The new president the new.

Speaker 6 (01:11:46):
Law, we still have a fallback position, and that is
that proposition for at its core functions as a procedural
framework rather than mandating outcomes and what I mean by
that is this The Utah Supreme Court itself noted that
proposition for does not remove the legislature's authority to enact maps.

Speaker 7 (01:12:08):
Instead, it just serves as.

Speaker 6 (01:12:09):
A check on the process to foster accountability. So the
Court's role in reviewing the legislature's maps should be limited
to verifying the legislature that the legislature complied with the procedures.
And what we mean by that is, you know, just
ensure that the Commission proposed some maps, that public hearings
were held, and that the legislature provided a justification for why.

Speaker 7 (01:12:30):
It chose to adopt its own maps.

Speaker 6 (01:12:32):
Because the legislature gets to choose the maps, judges do
not get to substitute their own preferences for that of
the legislature. The judges have no authority to pick maps.
The Commission has no authority to pick maps. The Commission
can only recommend maps. The legislature has all the authority
to disregard, just so long as the legislature follows the procedures.

(01:12:53):
And so I made this analogy to the National Environmental
Policy Acts. That's a procedural statute that yeah, and it
requires identification of potential effects of a project. You have
to come up with alternatives and mitigation strategies, you have
to have public input, but it does not dictate a
course of action for the project. NIPA does not give

(01:13:15):
environmental groups or judges a veto on the project, in
the same way that the Commission and the judges do
not have a veto on the maps drawn by the legislatures,
just as long as the legislature follows those procedures that
jump through the hoops.

Speaker 2 (01:13:28):
Corey, what about the possibility if the lawmakers have been
ordered to redo the maps or reconsider what they did,
if they go back to the judge with what changes
they've made and she doesn't like them, is there a
possibility that she could do the maps herself. Is that
a possibility?

Speaker 7 (01:13:48):
That is not how the law is written. And so
this is what I'm trying to explain to folks, is.

Speaker 6 (01:13:53):
That if the judge doesn't like the maps, the only
thing that she can do is say, legislature, you did
follow the procedures. But if the legislature follows the procedures,
and that means, you know, holding public hearings showing why
that they decided to keep this community together. And have
this contiguous line drawn just.

Speaker 7 (01:14:16):
As long as they dot those i's and cross those keys.

Speaker 6 (01:14:19):
The judge has no authority whatsoever to come back and say, no,
I don't like what you've drawn.

Speaker 7 (01:14:24):
I'm going to redraw it for you. There's no there's
no provision in the Statute in proposition for that would
allow that.

Speaker 6 (01:14:31):
And the Commission has really no role to play other
than recommending their own maps. They can draw a map
and say hey, legislature, do you like this one? And
the legislature can say no, and we're going to draw
it this way and we're going to follow the procedures, and.

Speaker 7 (01:14:43):
The judge has no authority to overrule that.

Speaker 3 (01:14:46):
So this is probably too wonkish.

Speaker 1 (01:14:48):
But do they have to show their work like a
math problem that they've already done? Are they supposed to
do it again? Because I can tell you thirty days
to have that process done right, having been there before,
I've been through redistricting. Your public hearing is alone you
can't accomplish if you're going to do it right in
the thirty days. She's given them a thirty day timeline
to do all this. Do they have to show previous
work or are they supposed to do things that have

(01:15:10):
never been seen by way of process to redistrict these maps,
or you go through that process again, Corey.

Speaker 6 (01:15:16):
They will have to show their work and they are
going to have to go through the process again. Because
she dubbed HB two thousand and four, which was essentially
the twenty twenty one maps. She decided that that was
in violation. And again that issue was not briefed by
the parties, and so she shouldn't have decided that, but
she did. And so now the legislature's in the position

(01:15:36):
that essentially needs to go through the process again, and
it does need to show its work. That's actually the
most important part, and that's what we're talking about when
we say procedures is show your work. And at the end,
as long as the work is shown, the judge doesn't
have the authority to overrule those maps. And it is
a ridiculous timeline. One hundred percent agree.

Speaker 2 (01:15:55):
As part of our list back Friday segments, our conversation
with Corey Astill about the decision by a judge on
redistricting and jerry mandering. More coming up on the Rowden
Greg Show. You know we talked last hour with John
Daniel Davidson and Brooke Branching about transgenderism, the experience that
she had. She told the pretty amazing story as to
what she saw as a teenager at the age of fourteen.

(01:16:15):
You know, one of the issues that has not come
up during a lot of these shootings, especially involving kids,
is the issue of divorce and how it impacts these
kids greg and it's something nobody is willing to.

Speaker 3 (01:16:26):
Talk about, and it's a major impact.

Speaker 1 (01:16:28):
Yeah, obviously, and we've known this just on society and
young people generally, but I think there's an accumulative effect
going on in America and this certainly is one of
the really serious issues that young people are struggling through
amongst all the issues that we see today.

Speaker 2 (01:16:44):
Well, we spoke earlier this week with Beverly Willett. She
is an author, and we asked, Beverly, why are people
so afraid to talk about the connection between school shootings
and divorce.

Speaker 9 (01:16:53):
Because they want to keep the divorce pipeline going that's
been going for fifty five years and with a publishing company,
companies and journalists selling the You know, I deserve to
be happy and self fulfilled because I think it means
that you as parents, you have to say, ooh, I

(01:17:14):
can't just do what I want, or maybe if I'm
just not happy in my marriage, I can't just get out.
I think it causes self reflection. I mean, I happen
to be posting on social media and I got all
this kind of flat rationalization. I don't think parents, no
parent wants this to happen to their children. I mean,
I think we can be honest about that. Of course

(01:17:36):
they don't. But too many and not only parents, the
policymakers have really been putting their head in the sand
about the negative consequences of no fault divorce for going
on five decades now, and things are bubbling up, and
we have so much data on the negative consequences, and
now we're starting to see that there's a connection with

(01:17:56):
violent boys. We have to address this.

Speaker 1 (01:18:00):
Know, I have I have a unique perspective, and that
my mother was a single mother when I was born
and raised, and she got married and then divorced, and
so I have some sisters that have gone through the
divorce part. And then I have been married for thirty
two years and have had three children and adult adults
now where we're not divorced. So I've seen kind of
all the different perspectives of different types of families. I

(01:18:22):
don't know why people get defensive. Isn't it intuitive that
if you have a mom and a father, a mother
and a father and you're raising children, I mean, you
can help each other. There's kind of like some you know,
some backup there, and that that would produce a healthier
child just naturally. Why do why are people getting so defensive?
Why do you do you think you're getting the feedback
on you know, on the posts and everything about your

(01:18:43):
your work and your study.

Speaker 13 (01:18:44):
On this.

Speaker 4 (01:18:47):
Well.

Speaker 9 (01:18:47):
As I said, I think it's just because we have
a culture now where this individual freedom and we don't
want to have anything in our way that puts puts
a puts a block between that. And we also have
if you check, if you look at it, because I've
been writing in this area for about two decades now,

(01:19:07):
you have the perpetuation of this myth of the good divorce.
You have this perpetuation of this myth that if I
am personally happier, my children will be happier. Okay, And
you see that constantly being fed to people. Because I've
even seen kids, you know, I've seen some adult kids

(01:19:29):
say well, you know, I wish my parents had gotten a divorce.
Well maybe maybe you heard them argue, but maybe if
it wasn't a violent home, which it doesn't seem to be,
maybe you wouldn't have gone to college, maybe you wouldn't
be Okay, right now, people don't think that extra step,
that maybe the protective value of your parents, who weren't

(01:19:52):
just feeling like Cinderella and Prince Charming anymore. But it
was okay that that actually they did so something very
valuable for you and your future. And you know a
lot of adult children of divorce are now speaking out
about that, speaking about the value of that and also
you know, the effects that it had on them. I mean,
we have tons of data, but now we're starting to

(01:20:14):
really hear from those people in their own words, which
is very important.

Speaker 2 (01:20:17):
Beverly, you said we have tons of data on this.
Can you point to one or two studies that really,
you know, bring to like this issue maybe as clear
as any time before any of the studies involved.

Speaker 9 (01:20:29):
Well, you know there was in my article I mentioned
a twenty eighteen international study, but I would really point
everyone to the work at the Institute of Family Studies
in Virginia under Brad Wilcox. That's been done over several decades.
He's done a couple of studies just particularly on this
issue about the connection between family breakdown and violence in

(01:20:53):
our communities and the number of school shooters who actually
came around broken homes. I mean, it's pretty eerie if
you start looking at that data on their website. There's
also another study that just came out in twenty twenty
four that shows that young men from non intech families

(01:21:13):
are more likely to land in prison or jail than
they are to graduate from college. So that's a new
study that just came out in twenty twenty four.

Speaker 1 (01:21:23):
So school shootings, that's a pretty extreme and there is
you show a link, it's a very strong one. But
what are some of the violent symptoms or tendencies that
could that wouldn't be a school shooting, but would really
be something we should be paying attention to and tracking
with these children emerging from divorced homes.

Speaker 9 (01:21:42):
Yes, and that, of course not all kids are going
to wind up being the school shooters, or I should
say boys, because it's ninety percent are males. But we
have so many other devastating consequences of no fault divorce too.
We have poverty, we have depression, increased rates of depression, anxiety,

(01:22:04):
substance abuse, both drugs and both alcohol and drugs, increased smoking.
We have generational divorce. We have a longevity study that
was done with kids over eight decades showing that likelihood
of dying five years earlier than their peers. That's huge

(01:22:33):
and that's been out for like a decade. That came
out of the University of California. It is such a
marvelous study, the biggest longitudinitudinal study that was ever done,
and people are still ignoring it.

Speaker 2 (01:22:43):
On our news maker line, Beverly Willett talking about the
connection between school shooters and divorce. I got any big
plans for the weekend. You're batching it this weekend.

Speaker 1 (01:22:51):
Just make sure the house is the way Queen Bee
left it when she left for this Vaca and my
daughter Sophie. But yeah, we want to just I just
got a whole down the fort.

Speaker 3 (01:23:00):
That's my job. Got a lot of lists, got a
lot of lists.

Speaker 2 (01:23:03):
Pay attention to the list. Yes, may Queen be happy?
All right? That does it for us this weekend. As
we say each and every night, head up, shoulders back.
May God bless you and your family. Enjoy the weekend.
Everybody watch a lot of football. Have a good weekend.

Speaker 10 (01:23:15):
We'll do.

Speaker 2 (01:23:16):
We'll be back on Monday. Talk to you then

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: The Evils of Trans-Ideologies; Utah's New Homeless Services Campus

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

All Episodes